The problem a lot of people get into is expecting sequels to be exactly like the previous installment. Deus Ex: Invisible War is a great game in my opinion and I make no apologies for liking it. Does it stand up to the original? Fuck no… not even a little bit. Judged on its own though is it a good FPS/RPG game? Yes, I think so.

Similarly people want Dragon Age 2 to be exactly what the former was and miss that it's a good part-based tactical RPG in its own right, despite some changes both positive and negative.

I agree about Invisible War. I actually had the benefit (from an "ignorant" of the original standpoint) of having never played Deus Ex in 2003 when Invisible War came out (didn't have a computer that could run the original Dues Ex back then. Don't laugh, it was a bit of a "system hog" in those days). I absolutely loved it, and was shocked that so many people hated it. A few years later, I finally played the original Deus Ex, and I could immediately see why people thought the first was better. It's just a shame that those perceptions caused so much hatred for Invisible War, which wasn't as good, but was still a great experience for me and didn't deserve its fate as a mostly forgotten game.

As far as DA2 goes, perception might play a role in the disappointment, as it's only natural to expect a sequel to be similar to its predecessor. However, for me personally, it's not the fact that DA2 is different that truly bothers me; Invisible War taught me the lesson long ago that not all changes should be hated in a sequel, and that an open mind can allow one to enjoy a variety of gameplay experiences. What has caused my complaints about DA2 has been an objective look at what these changes are, and I have judged the game purely as its own entity. A lot of the changes in DA2 do not feel like improvements, they feel like a step in the wrong direction, leaving the underwhelming feeling that DA2 is not a new experience, but a watered-down version of a previous experience. Redundancy is not innovation. These changes that have been made have not been implemented from a creative or artistic standpoint to make the game better, but from a financial standpoint. I know that I am an idealist, but I still understand the need to for a game to be financially successful. However, any design decisions that go beyond the need to be financially secure, or changes that are openly created purely for the sake of creating larger profit margins, are really hard to stomach and clearly do not add any depth to a game.

Even then, an enjoyable game is an enjoyable game regardless of why a game has been designed in a particular way, but DA2 is not a game that I will enjoy. Not because it's different, because change can be a good thing if the changes are innovative, but because it's unappealing from an objective standpoint. It is unappealing to me not as a sequel to DA:O, but is unappealing as it's own unique entity.